novel Frankeinstein by mary shelley?

Question

who is the antagonist and the protagonist? is the monster to blame for bein cruel? or should victor be blamed for creatin the monster and lettin it go and never acceptin the consequences? give me some ideas

I do believe that victor and the monster interchange with each other from being protagonist and antagonist? victor is good at first then doesnt take responsability, monster is very caring at first then kills everyone related to victor? any further arguements supporting this thesis?!

Answer 1

I think Victor and his monster can be described as the antagonist and protagonist interchangeably. Even though most readers assume that Victor Frankenstein is the "protagonist" because he is the main character of the story, I have read many critical essays that proclaim Victor as the antagonist, his monster as the protagonist, and vice versa.

Both can be seen as the antagonist of the story. On one hand, Victor is to blame for being the harsh, unaccepting, unloving "father" to his creation. Victor fails to create the companion that the creature yearns and pleads for. On the other hand, the creature is to blame for being destructive and murderous.

However, we also find protagonist-like qualities in both of these characters. Victor sincerely loves Elizabeth and demonstrates sympathy and remorse for the loss of his friends and family. Also, the creature tries to help the poor family that he watches from the forest by bringing them firewood.

There are many more instances that demonstrate the good and bad qualities of the characters. It is difficult to analyze which character is "worse" and which is "better" than the other.

One particular thing that I learned from this frame narrative is that many different qualities of a person (or a creature) can ultimately define of the central questions of the novel, "What defines a monster?" What I discovered from Mary Shelley's novel is that Shelley did not aim to define the characters through the common "good verse evil" conflict, but that she wanted to explain that there can exist very fine-line differences between the humane and the inhumane, the man and the monster.

Answer 2

Great answers, but I want to get my two cents in. Victor got so involved that he treated the woman in the story terribly. Victor should be at the top of the "food chain" but the monster is the one who tried to help people he did not know.

Selflessness is the ultimate in maturity and love and Victor doesn't have these traits. I believe that she is saying that the lowest can actually be the highest and vice verso. Victor did not recognize his part and did not make amends to a soul.

Be the end Frankenstein had no idea what to do or where to go and he was angry at behaviors of other people who were without compassion.

Answer 3

I read this book two months ago. I feel bad for and pity the monster. Victor treats him so cruely and neglects him. Victor claims in the novel that he created the monster so he would feel like a parental figure. However, he neglects his greatest creation. Victor is the antagonist, and the monster in his own defense and reaction, is the protagonist.

Answer 4

Neither the monster nor Victor is to blame for the cruelty, but the family the monster tries to join. It is they who taught him cruel behavior by trying to hurt and abandoning him.

Answer 5

Victor is actually the one to blame. It is a story about taking responsibilty for the creation of a life and nurturing it. Victor commits the sin of hubris - playing God, then he abandons his creation and leaves it loose in a world it cannot possibly understand or function in...

Answer 6

They are both both. Are you studying Romanticism? They each represent the Romantic ideal of isolation: Victor because he chose to ostracize himself from society, the daemon because he was ostracized against his will. Both perpetuate their own isolation....there's much more on this.